Tennessean: Value-added scores aren’t perfect but do track students’ progress
Tuesday, January 18th, 2011 at 9:00 am
By David Mansouri
As a former Williamson County public school student, I would like to respond to the recent column by Sykes Cargile, “Value added calculation baffling, destructive.’’ (Jan. 14)
In the column, Mr. Cargile explained how Woodland Middle School, where he teaches, received very high achievement scores in eighth-grade science, but low value-added scores, leading him to conclude that value-added measurements are “absurd.’’
It’s important for Tennesseans to understand the Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System (TVAAS). TVAAS follows the progress of every Tennessee student from third grade through high school and provides a precise estimate of how much a student learns in a given year. In the third- through eighth grades and at Woodland Middle School, value-added scores are calculated by comparing how much a student learns in a given year to a “state-growth standard,’’ which outlines how much each student is expected to learn that year.
The question of why growth is measured in addition to achievement is a good one. A student’s achievement scores are strongly correlated with a student’s family background, socioeconomic status and a host of other factors. Measuring growth allows comparison between different schools and districts.
For instance, a teacher at an inner-city school might begin the year with students who were 30 percent proficient in reading at a seventh-grade level, and end the year with a proficiency of 60 percent at an eighth-grade level. A teacher in a suburban district, however, may begin the year with students at 90 percent proficiency in reading at a seventh-grade level and end the year at 80 percent proficiency at an eighth-grade level. While the suburban teacher’s students have higher proficiency levels, is the suburban teacher as effective as the inner-city one? Almost certainly not.
To assert that Woodland Middle School has little room for improvement, as Mr. Cargile does, is inaccurate. Brentwood Middle, La Vergne Middle and Grassland Middle schools are examples of other Middle Tennessee schools that received A’s or B’s in achievement in eighth-grade science, but also received A’s and B’s in value-added. At these schools, students have both high levels of academic achievement and significant year-to-year learning gains.
Value-added may not be perfect, but it does provide an important measure of how much progress our students are actually making each year.
David Mansouri is director of advocacy for the nonprofit Tennessee State Collaborative on Reform (SCORE).
This letter to the editor originally appeared in the January 18, 2011 Tennessean. Photo courtesy of the Tennessean.
Tennessean: Value-added scores aren’t perfect but do track students’ progress
Tuesday, January 18th, 2011 at 9:00 am
By David Mansouri
In the column, Mr. Cargile explained how Woodland Middle School, where he teaches, received very high achievement scores in eighth-grade science, but low value-added scores, leading him to conclude that value-added measurements are “absurd.’’
It’s important for Tennesseans to understand the Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System (TVAAS). TVAAS follows the progress of every Tennessee student from third grade through high school and provides a precise estimate of how much a student learns in a given year. In the third- through eighth grades and at Woodland Middle School, value-added scores are calculated by comparing how much a student learns in a given year to a “state-growth standard,’’ which outlines how much each student is expected to learn that year.
The question of why growth is measured in addition to achievement is a good one. A student’s achievement scores are strongly correlated with a student’s family background, socioeconomic status and a host of other factors. Measuring growth allows comparison between different schools and districts.
For instance, a teacher at an inner-city school might begin the year with students who were 30 percent proficient in reading at a seventh-grade level, and end the year with a proficiency of 60 percent at an eighth-grade level. A teacher in a suburban district, however, may begin the year with students at 90 percent proficiency in reading at a seventh-grade level and end the year at 80 percent proficiency at an eighth-grade level. While the suburban teacher’s students have higher proficiency levels, is the suburban teacher as effective as the inner-city one? Almost certainly not.
To assert that Woodland Middle School has little room for improvement, as Mr. Cargile does, is inaccurate. Brentwood Middle, La Vergne Middle and Grassland Middle schools are examples of other Middle Tennessee schools that received A’s or B’s in achievement in eighth-grade science, but also received A’s and B’s in value-added. At these schools, students have both high levels of academic achievement and significant year-to-year learning gains.
Value-added may not be perfect, but it does provide an important measure of how much progress our students are actually making each year.
David Mansouri is director of advocacy for the nonprofit Tennessee State Collaborative on Reform (SCORE).
This letter to the editor originally appeared in the January 18, 2011 Tennessean. Photo courtesy of the Tennessean.
Posted in Commentary.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.